Great fun can be had watching the ding-dong battle between the BBC and its ‘watch’ site Biased-BBC. I look at the BBC site quite a lot, and I also check out the Biased-BBC site from time to time.
Naturally, Biased-BBC is not too happy that the BBC is allegedly pumping out lots of anti-Christian propaganda before the UK census. This post lists the charge (http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2011/03/just-as-census-beckons.html).
There are essentially two accusations. Firstly, the Beeb is “trying to neutralise the presence of Christianity in the UK ahead of the Census.” As backup, it cites the BBC’s recent story about the “extinction of religion” in certain countries (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12811197), and then a link to the British Humanist Association’s recent study about religion in the UK. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12799801).
I haven’t really noticed the BBC ripping into Christianity any more than usual. If we go back to the influence of Christianity in the UK (certainly in terms of church attendance), it could arguably be said that it needs to be neutralised even more. Why does the BBC have to reflect the religious makeup of the country anyway? It does not. The second of the stories (the BHA study) is simply the reporting of facts. Admittedly, facts that Biased-BBC and various Christian groups don’t want to hear. I think it is down to Biased-BBC being more of a conservative outfit, than a religious one, though.
Biased-BBC also implies that the BHA is not partial (no evidence, of course), before describing archaeologist Francesca Stavrakopoulou as an ‘atheist’. This is something of a stretch. This is the woman who claimed God may have had a wife, remember! An atheist wouldn’t say such a silly thing. She has a doctorate in theology and presented the BBC’s ‘Bible Secrets’ programme, which Biased-BBC claim sets out to undermine the Bible. I would point out we hardly need archaeological digs to undermine the Bible! I would also point out that she is most definitely not an atheist.
Biased-BBC then moves onto Dr. Brian Cox, whose wonderful science-based programmes have been enjoyed by millions, even if the background music is a little loud (according to some). Biased-BBC claim he presents “theories on which there is often no scientific consensus as fact, with supreme confidence and naturally without the need for God.” Yes, you generally don’t need God when you make a science programme. BTW, Biased-BBC doesn’t say what theories are without scientific consensus. Maybe it’s because I could call them on it. This is just simple nit-picking.
The second criticism, more reflected in the comments of the thread, is that the BBC gives Islam far much more respect than say, Christianity. Biased-BBC may well be right here.
Like any central-Left media outfit they are frightened of offending Muslims. Christianity does not have the “special protection” demanded by Muslims for their religion. Believe me, there are many Christians and religious people who do demand that they are respected and that their faith is not questioned or mocked. But in the UK, there is a long tradition of questioning and mocking, and it is taken for granted that Christianity has no special privilege not to be criticised or mocked. The same attitude does not prevail towards Islam, simply because of the reason stated above. The double standard is glaring, but why should Christianity get the respect it wants just because another faith gets its respect through veiled threats. It shouldn’t, and I would argue, neither should Islam.
As an atheist I don’t have trouble with this double standard, but I do have trouble with the demands various religions make. It is time for it to stop. No religion is automatically granted special privilege not to be criticised or mocked, whatever religion it happens to be.
No comments:
Post a Comment